|
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Bill Hacker
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 27 Jan 2005
Posts: 427
|
 Posted: Fri Jul 14, 2006 12:06 pm Post subject:
Re: sender verify and greylisting
|
|
|
Tony Finch wrote:
| Quote: | On Fri, 14 Jul 2006, W B Hacker wrote:
Tony Finch wrote:
Boggle! How do you expect a thread-aware MUA to deal with your
messages sensibly when they have no thread information at all? Let
alone "less" thread-aware MUAs.
As in the screenshot: http://conducive.org/threading.tiff
There's no threading there. That's just sorting by subject with some bogus
scaffolding on the left-hand-side.
|
Not what is set in Mozilla, nor does it look the same if I DO sort on subkect.
....but never mind.
| Quote: | Note that you don't have more than one
level of nesting,
|
- for which I am grateful...
| Quote: | as (for example) the pipermail archive does.
See how Pine shows it, with nesting: http://dotat.at/graphics/pine.png
In particular see how the "ACL to reject spam" and MailScanner threads
have a structure that your screenshot doesn't show, and how the structure
of various threads has been flattened by your replies.
|
True - but even with a 1400-wide screen, that is what I would want anyway.
Sub-branching ad infinitum may be technically correct, and certinly useful in an
environment where side-issues fell into clear categories, (Groklaw, maybe?) but
for most technical support lists the differentiation is not worth the cost of
the back-and-fill navigation.
*snip*
| Quote: |
References and In-Reply-To.
Tony.
|
Thanks. Working on that now.
Bill
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bill Hacker
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 27 Jan 2005
Posts: 427
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 14, 2006 12:12 pm Post subject:
Re: sender verify and greylisting
|
|
|
Martijn Grendelman wrote:
| Quote: |
W B Hacker schreef:
As in the screenshot:
http://conducive.org/threading.tiff
Funny to see my own post hilighted in there. Does that mean you were
just about to post an answer to my question? :-)
Best regards,
Martijn.
|
Nicer 'strokes' than that.
It means you posted something novel or of more value than average that I want to
look into in more detail when time permits.
Mssrs. Finch and Hazel get the lion's share of those flags.
In this case it was a chance to compare my dormant PostgreSQL code with your
in-production MySQL code.
Presently we do not permit autoreply, and no user has ever missed it, so 'later'...
Bill
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stephen Gran
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 223
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 14, 2006 12:38 pm Post subject:
Re: sender verify and greylisting
|
|
|
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 07:18:08PM +0800, W B Hacker said:
| Quote: | Stephen Gran wrote:
*trimmed*
Why are you stripping In-Reply-To and References and so forth anyway? I
can't immediately imagine a reason for doing it.
Well - your very own post is a good example of a reason to cut down on
parasitical headers:
|
Again, I think you're mixing some things up here. If the 400 odd bytes
of X-Header content offends you, you can feel free to strip them out.
X-Headers are user or site specific, arbitrary, and irrelevant.
Standard headers like References (see how there's no X- prefix?) are
not, and should be left in place. That was the point of this
discussion.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Stephen Gran | birth, n: The first and direst of all |
| steve@lobefin.net | disasters. -- Ambrose Bierce, "The |
| http://www.lobefin.net/~steve | Devil's Dictionary" |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jakob Hirsch
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 403
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 14, 2006 1:22 pm Post subject:
Re: sender verify and greylisting
|
|
|
Quoting W B Hacker:
| Quote: | http://conducive.org/threading.tiff
|
You miss a very effective way to read mailing lists. See how it could
look like: http://plonk.de/stuff/threading.png
| Quote: | And, again, will someone kindly tell me what headers leave alone so as to help
*others*?
|
um... I told you a while ago per private mail, others here on the list:
at least In-Reply-To, preferrably also References.
regarding your other post:
| Quote: | Those seemed to be the ones giving rise to 'thread stealing' accusations.
Never did figure out how hitting 'reply' to a specific post I had open in the
window could arbitarily switch to some other thread, so we applied the BFBI
solution.
|
It was me that rised that. I thought it was clear what happens...
You hit reply, your MUA automatically puts the Message-Id of the message
you are replying to into the In-Reply-To header, and adds it to the
References header.
(At least that's what I think what happens, without having read the
relevant RFC, it seems to me the natural and logical way...)
By hitting reply, the message should never be shown in another thread,
unless your newly created message has no In-Reply-To, in which case
other's MUAs have to solely rely on the Subject, which you could have
changed.
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bill Hacker
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 27 Jan 2005
Posts: 427
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 14, 2006 1:53 pm Post subject:
Re: sender verify and greylisting
|
|
|
Jakob Hirsch wrote:
Thanks - but that is exactly the sort of artistic but useless eye-confusion I
need to avoid, and the primary reason I use threading ONLY to check the point.
Why would I want things to walk off to the right side of the page when the
subject already says all one needs? And pure descending date order is even
faster to read.
This is not source code.
| Quote: | And, again, will someone kindly tell me what headers leave alone so as
to help *others*?
um... I told you a while ago per private mail, others here on the list:
at least In-Reply-To, preferrably also References.
|
Thanks again - done already.
| Quote: | regarding your other post:
Those seemed to be the ones giving rise to 'thread stealing' accusations.
Never did figure out how hitting 'reply' to a specific post I had open
in the window could arbitarily switch to some other thread, so we
applied the BFBI solution.
It was me that rised that. I thought it was clear what happens...
You hit reply, your MUA automatically puts the Message-Id of the message
you are replying to into the In-Reply-To header, and adds it to the
References header.
(At least that's what I think what happens, without having read the
relevant RFC, it seems to me the natural and logical way...)
|
Moz MUA does *preserve* these if present, a view source show it so, anyway.
Haven't looked at how it manipulates them, as we do the header stripping in an
Exim transport. Moz DOES have a filter that moves incoming list traffic from
inbox to into a local folder, but that alters neither headers, body, nor
attachments.
| Quote: | By hitting reply, the message should never be shown in another thread,
unless your newly created message has no In-Reply-To, in which case
other's MUAs have to solely rely on the Subject, which you could have
changed.
|
That's true if a subject were changed.
But the original situation arose when creating a NEW subject, not on a reply.
That should have become a new thread if based on the unique message-ID my MUA
would have created - transformed on the way back out to the References, etc.
What seems to have happened instead is that the mesage-ID was new, but also that
prior headers were left over. Perhaps in the composer's buffer from an earlier
post that *was* a reply or an aborted one.
That WOULD 'steal a thread'.
If that happens again I'll know where to look.
Regards,
Bill
I suspect that
I now suspect that the compaint
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jakob Hirsch
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 403
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 14, 2006 4:28 pm Post subject:
Re: sender verify and greylisting
|
|
|
Quoting W B Hacker:
| Quote: | look like: http://plonk.de/stuff/threading.png
Thanks - but that is exactly the sort of artistic but useless eye-confusion I
need to avoid, and the primary reason I use threading ONLY to check the point.
|
Well, tastes obviously differ. I usually don't even look into the
message list pane when reading a mailing list. With the keyboards
shortcuts (n, b, f, m in TB) it's quite easy and convenient to follow a
discussion. You might not need that if your memory is better than mine
(which is not the best).
| Quote: | This is not source code.
|
Neither is a book's table of contents or other things which use
indention, but still they use (often long before somebody spoke about
source code). Because it's a fast way to conceive context, without
having to use brain processing time for parsing words.
Anyway, this is not the right place to discuss that, maybe if we push
the topic more into the "don't remove headers without good reason"
direction". :)
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Daniel Tiefnig
*nix forums addict
Joined: 03 Feb 2005
Posts: 56
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 6:16 am Post subject:
Re: sender verify and greylisting
|
|
|
W B Hacker wrote:
| Quote: | Never did figure out how hitting 'reply' to a specific post
[...]
But the original situation arose when creating a NEW subject, not on
a reply.
|
Uhm, no. ?o)
| Quote: | What seems to have happened instead is that the mesage-ID was new,
but also that prior headers were left over.
|
Of course they are.
| Quote: | That WOULD 'steal a thread'.
|
There is no such thing "thread stealing". What you're doing is just
*break* threading. Either by replying to messages you don't want to
reply to, or by removing Thread-Headers.
lg,
daniel
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matthew Byng-Maddick
*nix forums addict
Joined: 03 Feb 2005
Posts: 93
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 8:48 am Post subject:
Re: sender verify and greylisting
|
|
|
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 06:28:03PM +0200, Jakob Hirsch wrote:
| Quote: | Quoting W B Hacker:
Thanks - but that is exactly the sort of artistic but useless
eye-confusion I need to avoid, and the primary reason I use
threading ONLY to check the point.
Well, tastes obviously differ. I usually don't even look into the
|
Bill has made it clear on multiple occasions that he believes that if you
don't do things his way, you're obviously wrong. See also long and rambling
threads on iptables, and on databases for auth and everything else that he's
been involved in.
If he doesn't want threading, why should he care if he breaks it for everyone
else.
Cheers
MBM
--
Matthew Byng-Maddick <mbm@colondot.net> http://colondot.net/
(Please use this address to reply)
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stefan Klatt
*nix forums beginner
Joined: 12 May 2006
Posts: 22
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:09 pm Post subject:
Hold Smarthosts
|
|
|
Hello,
is there a way to hold (and unhold) selectiv all Emails for one (or more)
Smarthost like queue_domains for selective Domains?
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Stefan Klatt
CaC
Stefan Klatt Certified Warp 4 Engineer
Triftstrasse 9 Certified Warp Server Engineer
60528 Frankfurt Enterasys Partner
Bintec Partner
Tel.: +49-69-67808-915 email: stefan.klatt@cac-netzwerk.de
Handy: +49-172-6807809 2:244/1140@fidonet
Fax/BBS: +49-69-67808-835 2:244/1144@fidonet
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Finch
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 22 Mar 2002
Posts: 1222
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 10:43 pm Post subject:
Re: Hold Smarthosts
|
|
|
On Thu, 20 Jul 2006, Stefan Klatt wrote:
| Quote: |
is there a way to hold (and unhold) selectiv all Emails for one (or more)
Smarthost like queue_domains for selective Domains?
|
Not straightforwardly, I think. You can add a redirect router before your
smarthost router which grabs the addresses and uses :defer: to hold them
on the queue.
Tony.
--
<fanf@exim.org> <dot@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{\
N\}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*)}{\$1\$3\$2\$1\$3\n\$2\$3\$4\$3\n\$3\$2\$4}}\
\N}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*)}{\$1\$3\$2\$1\$3\n\$2\$3\$4\$3\n\$3\$2\$4}}
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stefan Klatt
*nix forums beginner
Joined: 12 May 2006
Posts: 22
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:27 am Post subject:
Re: Hold Smarthosts
|
|
|
Hello Tony,
| Quote: | is there a way to hold (and unhold) selectiv all Emails for one (or more)
Smarthost like queue_domains for selective Domains?
Not straightforwardly, I think. You can add a redirect router before your
smarthost router which grabs the addresses and uses :defer: to hold them
on the queue.
I thought about this... but how can i stop this defer ? |
Probably with option "-D" and a macro as a condition? Work this new
macrodefinition only at one programm run if exim4 works as a deamon or
forever till the exim4 deamon stops?
The reason is we have in germany a few ISPs they need a break of e.g. 15
min. between connections of each user :-(
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Stefan Klatt
CaC
Stefan Klatt Certified Warp 4 Engineer
Triftstrasse 9 Certified Warp Server Engineer
60528 Frankfurt Enterasys Partner
Bintec Partner
Tel.: +49-69-67808-915 email: stefan.klatt@cac-netzwerk.de
Handy: +49-172-6807809 2:244/1140@fidonet
Fax/BBS: +49-69-67808-835 2:244/1144@fidonet
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Heiko Schlittermann
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 16 Feb 2005
Posts: 102
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 9:06 am Post subject:
Re: Hold Smarthosts
|
|
|
Stefan Klatt <cac@gcs-online.de> (Do 20 Jul 2006 20:09:38 CEST):
| Quote: | Hello,
is there a way to hold (and unhold) selectiv all Emails for one (or more)
Smarthost like queue_domains for selective Domains?
|
Check the queue_only_file option, probably you can 'basteln' something
using it.
Best regards from Dresden
Viele Grüße aus Dresden
Heiko Schlittermann
--
SCHLITTERMANN.de ---------------------------- internet & unix support -
Heiko Schlittermann HS12-RIPE -----------------------------------------
gnupg encrypted messages are welcome - key ID: 48D0359B ---------------
gnupg fingerprint: 3061 CFBF 2D88 F034 E8D2 7E92 EE4E AC98 48D0 359B - |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Google
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
The time now is Sun Nov 23, 2008 2:08 pm | All times are GMT
|
|
Mortgages | Mortgages | Personal Loans | Consolidate Student Loans | Debt Management
|
|
Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
|
|
|
|
Other DeniX Solutions sites:
Unix/Linux blog |
electronics forum |
medicine forum |
science forum |
|
|
Privacy Policy
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Forum index
»
Apps
»
Exim
